dust ! is it really a problem.

[EmzDad]

Hi guys,

Been looking at a Nikon 18-200 VR, it was mentioned that the seller could see two tiny specks of dust in it.

Is this really a problem, on doing some reading it seems that most zooms will collect dust in them.

Thanks
Shane

[John King]

The dust specks are all but irrelevant.

Personally, I would not buy this lens even if I used Nikon cameras. Check out all the reviews. The SLRGear review is typical for this lens.

[EmzDad]

Old Ken Rockwell loves them, I suppose depends on what you read...

[John King]

G'day again Shane

SLRGear review here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/18-200mm-f3.5-5.6g-if-ed-vr-ii-dx-af-s-nikkor/review/

Personally, I wouldn't spend a dollar based on what Ken, or most other self-appointed Internet 'experts', says!

My personal experience of this lens comes from the pain a friend suffered after getting it with his new D300 as its kit lens. His wife's D90 + 18-105 consummately outperformed it!

[ameerat42]

Simply FWIW, as I have not researched it much past these two reviews, look in particular at the Conclusion in this link:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-18-200-3p5-5p6-vr-afs-n15

[EmzDad]

Hmmm... So good all-rounder... Great as practical lens, and dust is irrelevant with in reason.

Maybe I should just keep using my 35mm Lens for general and then buy the Sigma 150mm Macro I have been working at. Plus one 2x convertor. :nod:

[John King]

^ direct URL for that DPR review conclusions page:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-18-200-3p5-5p6-vr-afs-n15/4

It is more cheerful about this lens' optical qualities than most other reviews (except perhaps KR ... ).

The Olympus 18-180 was equally not particularly wonderful, being relatively uniformly unsharp over its entire FL range at most f-stops ...

I have just recommended to a friend that they avoid the Olympus micro four thirds 14-150 for similar reasons, although it is better than either the 18-200 or 18-180, and weather/dust sealed.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree that the Sigma 150 macro is probably a much better choice, Shane. All the users I know, and reviewers generally, think this to be an excellent lens whatever mount it came with.

[Cage]

Hmmm... So good all-rounder... Great as practical lens, and dust is irrelevant with in reason.

Maybe I should just keep using my 35mm Lens for general and then buy the Sigma 150mm Macro I have been working at. Plus one 2x convertor. :nod:

Shane, listen to that little voice in your head that keeps saying 'get the Sigma 150 Macro', but do some serious research before deciding on the 2X T/C in favour of the 1.4X T/C.

Comparing any 18 - ?mm lens with the Sigma 150mm is like comparing a VW with a Ferrari. They will both get you to where you want to go, and the VW will deliver you, but the Ferrari will put a smile on your face. :nod:

[arthurking83]

Personally .. I'd also not consider the 18-200 lens either ... UNLESS! .. unless it was very cheap.
While overall it's not a bad lens, and there are many sample images available on the net to prove this, in general, for the money you can get more lens for the same $ outlay.

Like John says, the little 18-105VR is a ripper lens for the money. I only bought mine as a general, dispensable! lens for my son to use many years ago.
I thought he'd be rough on it, but he'd proved that he's not a total airhead, and has looked after it.
The only problem that the 18-105VR has against it, is the exposure value (T-stop) this lens loses in real life.
That is, the lens is very dark compared to any other lens in my kit for the same settings.
That's easily accounted for once you know this, so in effect not really a major drawback.

The other lens I always recommend to Nikon owners in your situation is the 18-140VR. I've never seen one or used one, but the reviews say it's better than the 18-105VR, and for the price(low $400's new) .. it makes even more sense than the 18-105VR(mid $300's new).
By comparison, the 18-200 is nearly $1K new!.
Second hand prices will therefore be similarly proportional too!

So with the money you save on getting a 18-105 or 18-140 instead .. you can get a much better telephoto lens at the 200mm range(eg. 70-300mm) .. if the tele end of the range is what you want.
And while it does have the disadvantage of needing to swap out lenses when going from long end to short(er) end .. the focal length overlap is quite food with a two lens setup like that.

Also think of your daughter too!
The 18-200 is slightly larger and heavier than the 18-105 too, and as she's still quite young, the heavier lens may burden her a little.
ps. I have a similarly (slightly older) daughter and she doesn't like the weight of my D300 + <any lens>, but can handle a D70+18-105.

As for dust in lenses: as others have said .. generally no need to worry. It can cause some minor issues in some rare situations, but usually not worth concerning yourself about.

Oh! ... and like cage said .. that 150 Sigma is a great lens.
If I were 'funds restricted' and wanted both an all round zoomy lens and a nice sharp macro lens, but had to prioritise one over the other .. it'd be the sharp macro lens first any day of the week.

[EmzDad]

Shane, listen to that little voice in your head that keeps saying 'get the Sigma 150 Macro', but do some serious research before deciding on the 2X T/C in favour of the 1.4X T/C.

Comparing any 18 - ?mm lens with the Sigma 150mm is like comparing a VW with a Ferrari. They will both get you to where you want to go, and the VW will deliver you, but the Ferrari will put a smile on your face. :nod:

That little voice has won.... :nod::nod:

[robmj65]

buy a decent dust cleaner or take it to an expert shop!

[DadzEm]

Whoo Hoo! Dad bought me a new lens. I've been wanting to get more into macro but was restricted by the lens we have now, and now I'm going to have a macro lens to use(my precious):)
Now I'm going to have to make even more room in my after school schedule for photography fun!


PLEASE... can some one talk dad into buying a mono pod or a tripod.:nod:

[John King]

Hmmm. Something just slightly suspicious going on here ... ;).

Congrats on the new lens anyway ... :nod: :D.

Sigma f/2.8 150 macro with 1.4x TC by any chance ... ?

I can recommend a good monopod, if you like.

[EmzDad]

Em, your arvo home work comes first my little girl.. You might be in High-school... but I am still the boss :lol2:

John, I have been looking at a Feisol mono-pod cm-1471, there is second hand one floating around, I am just a little unsure of the seller.

I figure the Mono-pod would allow a little more flexibility. I may be wrong, Em is probably going to struggle holding the 150mm Macro free hand.

Also a heck of a lot cheaper than a very good tri-pod.

ps. Haven't gone the 1.4x yet. Working on that.

Thanks
Shane

[John King]

Shane, I reckoned that most monopods were too short to be able to form a proper triangle, and mostly too whippy, but I found a Benro A49T that is both strong and extends to around 1.8-2.0m. It is also light enough for me to carry all day if I need it.

That was the cheap part ...

I bought a Manfrotto heavy duty grip ball head s/h - 322 RC2 - I like it a lot.

When carrying my heavy 50-200 lens plus 1.4x TC on it, I just sling it over my shoulder like a swag pole. Strong enough for me to use it as a walking pole, or clobber a burglar with :lol:.

I also have a Manfrotto 190 series tripod with a Manfrotto pan and tilt head.

Both will lock with the above camera/lens combo without any creep.

While I don't use the tripod much, and probably less with the 5 axis IBIS in the E-M1, it was selling s/h from someone I knew at an exceptionally good price. Too good to pass up ;).

The new IBIS in the Olympus is nothing short of amazing. I can hand hold my 50-200 (EFL = 100-400) rock steady at 1/10th second at 200mm. It works using magnetic levitation of the sensor! The IBIS is my E-30 and E-510 is terrific, but nothing like 5+ stops better than the reciprocal rule (1/400th).

[Cage]

Congrats on the new toy Em and Shane (?), and welcome to the weird, wacky and wonderful world of Macro.

First up, let me introduce you to your new best friend, after the Siggy of course.

http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

Here is a snip for your lens:

124060

As you can see, at the lens closest focusing distance of 38cm, you have no DOF (Depth of Field) at all. In other words, good only for flat surfaces unless you do multiple takes, moving the camera a fraction each take, and stack the shots. But that's another story, and requires a stable tripod.

At this stage, handheld and with the lens OS on, you will be able to get great detailed shots of flowers and larger bugs etc with lovely blurred backgrounds. If you haven't already, it's probably a good idea for you and Em to have a look in the site Library at good camera holding techniques.

You mentioned a monopod in your post. Does it come with a head, either a dedicated monopod head, giving up and down adjustment, or a ball head. You will need one as the basic monopod doesn't come with either. I would suggest a good ballhead as you can also use it on a tripod.

I have the Manfrotto 681B (3 section) and I saw this one on fleabay, a 4 section job, for less than $90.00 delivered. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Manfrotto-680B-Aluminium-Monopod-/401073185724?hash=item5d61d323bc:g:40cAAMXQuCdTjJst

You will also need a plate to attach to your camera to enable you to mount it on the head. At this stage you have a decision to make with plates and clamps. My first tripod was a Chinese knock-off of a heavy duty Manfrotto job, and while the tripod was built like a brick outhouse, and weighed about the same, the 3 way head was dreadful with too much tolerance in the clamp/plate mating surfaces. I replaced it with the genuine Manfrotto item and to be honest it was not much better.

For me, the Arca Swiss compatible plate/clamp system is the way to go.

Another item to consider is a set of Macro Tubes. These allow you to get closer to your subject and therefore put more of the subject in the frame. This is another can of worms as there are some cheap and dreadful offerings on the market. I remember one cheap 'n' cheerful set I bought back in the early days that refused to dismount from the camera. :(

As your lens does not have an aperture ring you will need the set with the electrical contacts to enable the camera to auto-focus and set the aperture. Kenko seem well regarded although I bought a S/H set from a member here, Triplus brand, and they work just fine.

If you are beginning to think that photography is a never ending process of gear acquisition, known as GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), you are absolutely right. :nod:

[Cage]

I forgot to add this link to show the effect of extension tubes.

http://www.kenkotokinausa.com/products/kenko/slrc-04.html

Click on the sample pics on the LHS.

[EmzDad]

Yep Em and Shane is correct cage.

Thanks guys for the links to different items. Much appreciated.

[Cage]

Yep Em and Shane is correct cage.

Thanks guys for the links to different items. Much appreciated.

The question mark was to query the ownership. Em seems to have claimed her 'precious'. :lol2:

[EmzDad]

We will let Em think that, some times a farther must let his daughter think she is right to achieve the end goal.

A father must also be patient in bringing his Daughter to relize the truth.... To fast and she will consider him bossy, to slow and she may get hurt and feel he dosn't care...

[Cage]

You sound like a caring and switched-on Dad. :th3:

[TL88]

Just as a beginner question sorry, how do you keep dust out/off the lens?

[John King]

Gidday TL

One really needs to buy dust/weather-sealed lenses for your camera. These have seals and O rings around all the openings into the lens, and also have some kind of 'breathing apparatus' so that the lens does not suck air either from the outside or through the camera body when it is focusing, zooming and just from flaying around in the environment.

We live on a dusty planet. Dust is the part that's left behind after the soft parts of the Himalayas have worn down to a flat plain. Dust particles are therefore extremely hard, and can cause serious damage to lens elements, and to the working parts of the lens through abrasion and bogging them up inside.

Camera bodies can also allow air to be sucked through them into the lens.

I have two non-sealed bodies and two sealed bodies. Neither have dust problems. About half my lenses are sealed, the other half not. To date, none of them have any dust (oldest body and lenses are about 13 y.o.). I don't baby my gear, but nor do I ill treat it.

I also use protective filters on all but two of my lenses. I have never yet damaged the front element of a lens, or its coatings, by cleaning the filter ... ;).

[ameerat42]

Just as a beginner question sorry, how do you keep dust out/off the lens?

Avoid dusty situations as far as you can, otherwise With some difficulty, and even then, dust in the lens may not be
as much a problem as dust and other gunk on the sensor. The same difficulty applies to keeping that clean. Best to
clean/get it cleaned off when it does.